When Disagreement Turns into Hate

Respectful disputant: R' Aharon Feldman (Agudah)

Azoi Vie’s Chrisilt’s Zich, Yiddilt’s Zich. This popular Yiddish expression loosely translates as follows: Just as the Christian world in which we live evolves culturally, so too does our own Jewish world. That phrase is still relevant today. The idea being that no matter how much we try to insulate ourselves from culturally negative influences, they will somehow eventually find their way into the Jewish world and become part of our own culture. That expression came to mind after reading Rabbi Elchanan Poupko’s excellent article in VIN. It resonated with me. 

His point was that respectful dialogue that once existed between people of differing Hashkafos or values has degenerated into vitriolic attacks by one side against the other. I see it here all the time. I actually try to delete some of the more egregious ones although I admit not always being successful. 

I have mentioned why this is the case in the past. But it bears repeating since things seem to have only gotten worse. The culprit in my view is the ability to remain anonymous. That frees up people who might otherwise be more careful about how they express their views to say what they really think.  If they were to identify themselves when spewing all that vitriol it would make them look like terrible people in the eyes of their family and friends. 

The truth is, however, that anonymity allows people to reveal their true character.  Their normally dispassionate disagreement is really just a façade - an act for public consumption.  

I once toyed with the idea of requiring commentators to use their real names in order to eliminate - or at least reduce the venom. But then I realized that a lot of people would just stop commenting – for fear of slipping up and saying things they might regret. Which would reveal their true character. 

The flip side to this argument is precisely the fact that truth will only come about if people are allowed to express their views without fear of negative consequences to their reputations. I suppose they have a point. But that would mean that the respectful dialogue that was so common in the past wasn’t really how the protagonists in a debate really felt. That they were only expressing half truths at best. 

Respectful disputant: R' Aharon Lichtenstein, ZTL (Jewish Action)

I can’t accept that. I recall one such dialogue not all that long ago between 2 childhood friends that became giants in their religious communities. The disputants were R’ Aharon Feldman and R’ Aharon Lichtenstein. The debate was about what the proper attitude should be about the secular state of Israel. Although their views were ideologically worlds apart, the respect – and even love for each other that began in the youth as students in the same school was palpable.  Truly something to behold. 

This hardy exists anymore. Ideology has become the great divider. It exists well beyond the borders of Emes VeEmunah. The venom in Israel spewed at each other between secular and religious public is some of the worst I’ve ever seen.  

My heart yearns for the days of old. Where respectful dialogue between disputants ruled the day. As Rabbi Poupko noted: 

Looking through old issues of the RCA’s Tradition magazine, one sees constant robust discussions between luminaries of all streams of orthodoxy… 

…looking for a speech of Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, I found an exchange between him and Professor Aaron Twersky published in the Jewish Observer–a publication of the Agudath Israel of America. Sadly, such exchanges have become today far less common than they have in the past.  

Indeed. The art of respectful dialogue between two disputants of differing Hashkafos seems to have all but disappeared. Replaced by venomous attacks and vitriol. What have we gained by all this? Only more hatred of the other. Increasingly seeing ideological opponents as evil. This is what’s going on in the Christian world (e.g. liberals versus conservatives)- and is now a part of the Jewish world too. 

I wish I could do something about it. I wish I  could change the trajectory But sadly, I see things only getting worse.  

With respect to this blog, however, things could actually improve if people allowed their true identities to be known – and had the courage of their convictions to say what they believe even if it is not the popular view. I am convinced that respectful dialogue would ensue and that commentators would do a far better job of broadening the perspectives of their ideological opponents. The result would still be their truth but without hate. As things stand now the vitriol that characterizes so many of the ideological dialogue here only increases hatred.  

Unfortunately, as a realist I don’t see this happening. But I can dream, can’t I?